I think the recommendations we've seen coming out of the various parties have been fairly wide-ranging in terms of what they're looking at. They're indicating gaps in terms of those with catastrophic injuries, whether the financial stream is adequate over time, whether we're providing enough support to families, whether we're using health professionals adequately. There's really a great deal of good information there, and I think there are a couple of ways we're dealing with that.
There are certain recommendations we can look at now to strengthen what we do within the current authority we have, some of the red-tape issues Jane talked about, strengthening case management, making sure our staff are well trained, trying to reduce and simplify. So there are many. The other one is maximizing the authorities we currently have in terms of providing services to families. All of that is under way and will take some time.
Then the remaining gaps or remaining recommendations we do need to look at and assess what kind of an impact they would have in terms of the overall scheme. I'm a firm believer that we've built the right foundation, that we have the right principles. Whatever changes we're making and whatever recommendations we're dealing with need to respect the fundamental foundation that's been built, because it is very much built on current practice, and the most available research, and is strongly supported by academics and experts in the field of disability across multiple kinds of jurisdictions. So I think we would have to make that a priority.
Again, it will not be for us to decide, obviously. It will be a decision of government in terms of what might occur.